Talk:Sleeping Beauty (1959 film)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

The "gallery"

There is no sensible reason why we need four pictures of Sleeping Beauty in the same bed in the same pose taken from four different angles. Choose one and stick with it. --FuriousFreddy 00:27, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Page move

This page was moved from "Sleeping Beauty (1959 movie)" to "Sleeping Beauty (1959 film)" as per the naming convention set out at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films) – Ianblair23 (talk) 01:40, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

• I'm also thinking the same thing. As far as I'm aware, there's currently no other film named Sleeping Beauty. --Ixfd64 03:21, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

• I did some research and found a few other films named Sleeping Beauty. [1] [2] [3] However, I don't think that any of them are notable enough to merit their own Wikipedia articles. --Ixfd64 05:21, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Red Rose

I'm just wondering why was a red rose placed in the hand of the sleeping princess, when she was put on her bed? Where did the fairies get the red rose they placed on her hands from?. SNIyer12 (talk) 20:58, 30 January 2005 (UTC)

It is not explained in the movie. I think it was symbolic, symbolizing the name the three fairies gave her. - Redmess 17:37, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Trivia section?

Is it worth adding a trivia section to this article? I think it would be of note to mention in this article that Eleanor Audley, the actress who voiced Maleficent, also voiced Lady Tremaine in Cinderella. Along these same lines, Flora, the lead fairy, is voiced by Verna Felton, the same actress who voiced the Fairy Godmother in Cinderella. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.33.149.86 (talk) 04:29, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Trivia about parents

Both of Princess Aurora's parents survive the film - thus she is the first heroine to have this happen, not Wendy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.163.200.210 (talk • contribs) .

EDIT: Sorry - had the dates wrong, I thought Sleeping Beauty predated Peter Pan —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rockin442 (talk • contribs) .

Nope, I checked. =) Powers ^T 03:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

The taunt of Maleficient

It was Maleficient, not the three good fairies, who told the prince of her curse on Aurora. The fairies only explained their change on the curse. - Redmess 17:40, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

splitting the biography of Princess Aurora into its own article?

Should we split the biography of Princess Aurora into its own article? Not only does Aurora exist outside of Sleeping Beauty, she's also quite notable in the Disney franchise. Also, many other Disney characters have their own articles. --Ixfd64 03:53, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

unexplained removal of categories

I've added the article to Category:Fictional princesses and Category:Kingdom Hearts characters, but other users keep reverting this change. Could any involved editors please explain why? As far as I'm aware, most of the major characters in Sleeping Beauty do appear in the Kingdom Hearts series. Also, I don't see any reason why this article should not be in Category:Fictional princesses. I prefer not to revert the other users' edits again, as I don't like to create friction among my fellow Wikipedians. --Ixfd64 05:52, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I've also added a link to the film script but Tregoweth (talk · contribs) removed it. Does anyone know if links to film scripts are considered unencylopedic? I looked everywhere in the guidelines but could not find anything on this matter. Since Tregoweth is an experienced editor, he probably knew what he was doing, but an explanation from him would be appreciated. I guess that's why edit summaries are so important! --Ixfd64 20:39, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I removed Category:Fictional princesses and Category:Kingdom Hearts characters because the article is about the film, not the character. Also, any scripts online are almost certainly copyright violations, so they shouldn't be linked to. From Wikipedia:Copyright#Linking to copyrighted works:

If you know that an external Web site is carrying a work in violation of the creator's copyright, do not link to that copy of the work. Knowingly and intentionally directing others to a site that violates copyright has been considered a form of contributory infringement in the United States (Intellectual Reserve v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry). Linking to a page that illegally distributes someone else's work sheds a bad light on Wikipedia and its editors.

If Disney themselves were to post the script online, that would probably be fine. —tregoweth (talk) 04:58, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

• All right, thanks for clearing it up. Cheers! :) --Ixfd64 05:46, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

"Along with The Black Cauldron it is widely considered as the most misinterpreted of all Disney Animated films."

           what does this mean?? "misinterpreted"? in terms of what? the black cauldron article says nothing about this either. someone please explain!

Fair use rationale for Image:PrincessAuroraSleeps.jpg

Image:PrincessAuroraSleeps.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 21:00, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Negative

I really do find this article awful to read. It seems to drag on focusing on all the negativity of the film's initial release and the problems with production, and doesn't even mention its success later and present. I find it paints an extremely bad and negative picture of the film over all which intact it isn't and quite the opposite from what the article says.

Agreed. The article seems only to focus on the fact that Sleeping Beauty failed to produce the revenue that had been hoped for. Nothing is mentioned about the fact that it was the second most successful film at the US box office after Ben Hur. This information is included 1959 in film article, and on the Picture Perfect: The Making of Sleeping Beauty section of the Collector's Platinum Edition DVD. It grossed more than any other film released since 1953, and even then was only just below Peter Pan (1953). 86.10.75.40 (talk) 21:35, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Incorrect data...

The current article incorrectly cites the 'Cinderella' Platinum DVD as featuring Helene Stanley's modeling as Aurora. Obviously, the 'Sleeping Beauty' Special Edition DVD is the correct disc title.

Additionally, the article cites production's use of rotoscoping. To the best of my knowledge, 'Sleeping Beauty' did not utilize the rotoscope when creating/animating the characters of this film.

I've actually seen the live-action reference footage on one of the Walt Disney Treasures, and they weren't filming the person and drawing over it, they were just watching her movements and drawing Aurora separately, making it not rotoscoping.--Dmcman (talk) 00:07, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Regarding what is necessary to wake Aurora from her deep sleep, it's true love's first kiss--not true love's kiss. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.231.240.78 (talk) 07:46, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Audrey Hepburn?

I've heard from various, not entirely credible sources that while Aurora's motions were based on the same woman who did Cinderella, her appearance is based on Audrey Hepburn. Can anyone tell me if this is true or not? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sailorknightwing (talk • contribs) 03:05, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

The actual Disney site will tell you that her original character models were, and than updated to match the backgrounds of the film. Helene Stanley did Aurora, Cinderella, and Anita from 101 Dalmations. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nj3hLSP1vFo 74.70.204.125 (talk) 03:07, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it's true. According to the book included in the Collector's Platinum Edition, the concept which became the backbone for Aurora's character design was inspired by Audrey Hepburn. It was created by artist Tom Oreb. See book, pg 89. 86.10.75.40 (talk) 21:00, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Fantasia Reference?

Is it just me or does the scene of the demons dancing in Maleficent's palace heavily reference the NIght on Bald Mountain from Fantasia? Given Disney's tendency to occasionally re-use animation cues, I'm wondering if this should be noted somewhere.Hal 10000.0 (talk) 23:56, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

It's not up to us to note it, unless a reliable source has done so first. Powers ^T 14:15, 18 January 2010 (UTC)